Good for you, bad for me? The daily dynamics of perspective taking and well-being in coworker dyads.

IF 5.9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Occupational Health Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-13 DOI:10.1037/ocp0000367
Ulrike Fasbender, Wladislaw Rivkin, Fabiola H Gerpott
{"title":"Good for you, bad for me? The daily dynamics of perspective taking and well-being in coworker dyads.","authors":"Ulrike Fasbender, Wladislaw Rivkin, Fabiola H Gerpott","doi":"10.1037/ocp0000367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Perspective taking is encouraged by organizations as a form of supporting coworkers. Yet, its impact on employees' and coworkers' well-being is not well understood. We, therefore, take a dyadic approach to understand the daily dynamics of employees' perspective taking, its benefits for coworkers, and its costs for employees themselves. Specifically, we draw from self-regulation theory to examine the double-edged sword of perspective taking for one's own and one's coworker's well-being (reflected by subjective vitality). With regard to coworker well-being, we take an other-oriented resource lens and theorize that the focal employee's perspective taking increases the coworker's received support and well-being. With regard to the focal employee's well-being, we take a self-oriented resource lens and theorize that perspective taking increases the focal employee's self-regulatory resource depletion, which impairs their well-being. We examined our research model in a dyadic experience sampling study with three daily measurement occasions over 2 working weeks in a sample of 89 coworker dyads (178 individuals). Multilevel analyses showed that perspective taking had a positive indirect effect on coworker well-being via received coworker support, while it had a negative indirect effect on the focal employee's well-being via self-regulatory resource depletion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48339,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000367","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Perspective taking is encouraged by organizations as a form of supporting coworkers. Yet, its impact on employees' and coworkers' well-being is not well understood. We, therefore, take a dyadic approach to understand the daily dynamics of employees' perspective taking, its benefits for coworkers, and its costs for employees themselves. Specifically, we draw from self-regulation theory to examine the double-edged sword of perspective taking for one's own and one's coworker's well-being (reflected by subjective vitality). With regard to coworker well-being, we take an other-oriented resource lens and theorize that the focal employee's perspective taking increases the coworker's received support and well-being. With regard to the focal employee's well-being, we take a self-oriented resource lens and theorize that perspective taking increases the focal employee's self-regulatory resource depletion, which impairs their well-being. We examined our research model in a dyadic experience sampling study with three daily measurement occasions over 2 working weeks in a sample of 89 coworker dyads (178 individuals). Multilevel analyses showed that perspective taking had a positive indirect effect on coworker well-being via received coworker support, while it had a negative indirect effect on the focal employee's well-being via self-regulatory resource depletion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对你有利,对我不利?同事二人组的日常动态视角和幸福感。
作为一种支持同事的形式,组织鼓励采取观点。然而,它对员工和同事幸福感的影响还没有得到很好的理解。因此,我们采用二元方法来理解员工视角的日常动态,它对同事的好处,以及员工自己的成本。具体来说,我们从自我调节理论出发,考察了为自己和同事的幸福(通过主观活力反映)采取观点的双刃剑。关于同事的幸福感,我们采取了一种以他人为导向的资源视角,并推断出焦点员工的观点会增加同事获得的支持和幸福感。对于焦点员工的幸福感,我们从自我导向的资源视角出发,认为视角的获取增加了焦点员工的自我调节资源枯竭,从而损害了他们的幸福感。我们在一个二元经验抽样研究中检验了我们的研究模型,在两个工作周的时间里,对89个同事二元(178个人)进行了三次每日测量。多层次分析表明,视角采取通过获得同事支持对同事幸福感产生积极的间接影响,而通过自我调节资源耗竭对焦点员工幸福感产生消极的间接影响。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Journal of Occupational Health Psychology offers research, theory, and public policy articles in occupational health psychology, an interdisciplinary field representing a broad range of backgrounds, interests, and specializations. Occupational health psychology concerns the application of psychology to improving the quality of work life and to protecting and promoting the safety, health, and well-being of workers. This journal focuses on the work environment, the individual, and the work-family interface.
期刊最新文献
Proactive employees perceive coworker ostracism: The moderating effect of team envy and the behavioral outcome of production deviance. Supportive-leadership training to improve social connection: A cluster-randomized trial demonstrating efficacy in a high-risk occupational context. A daily exercise prescription when work gets tough: The moderating effect of work demands on the relationship between daily physical exercise and next-day well-being and job performance. Family intergenerational stress: Concept exploration and development via coping and identity management. Financial stress and leadership behavior: The role of leader gender.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1